Wonder if the departure of DPReview gives a new life to m4/3? One of the reasons i stopped participating (and eventually reading) was the constant equivalency shilling every single time a m4/3 product was released.
There were a few people on there who just had a bug up their aperture about it and wouldn’t let it go - and they simply weren’t controlled by the Mods. Injected massive FUD (Fear, Uncertainty Doubt) into the minds of anyone looking at changing systems, and IMHO contributed significantly to the problems the format has with adoption.
Personally I hope this is a new chance to compete in in a newly open and honest space.
I had exactly the same thought: this might be the end of the 35mm format sensor hype.
One should distinguish the forum from the website though: in the video with their favorite products Chris and Jordan mention quite some MFT cameras and lenses (the first product featured is a MFT camera). Amazing isn’t it, knowing that those guys have access to everything from medium format to the smallest smartphone cameras.
As if to prove my point - as their dying words they just emphasized it as one of the very most significant things they like to cover.
Not self cleaning sensors
Not pioneering mirrorless
Not pioneering (and still best in class) video
Nope - what’s REALLY important is whether you can take a pictures of people in unrecognizable places with only their ears in focus.
I’ve generally found DPR’s coverage of m4/3 to be fair.
Given, hopefully, that this forum keeps attracting users, M43+; one can expect a spectrum of interests. And with that comes things that might prove irritating… Any time you gather 2 or more. ‘Politics’ exist in all subjects of human interest.
I find it more productive, interesting and ultimately positive to move away from or ignore obvious ‘irritation’. One something irritates, best not to scratch it…
Bring your own positivity - I expect this to be a great fresh start, here!
Honestly, I never really understood all the equivalence stuff, nor the endless debates over it. Hopefully we can quell that here in this forum. I’m here to discuss photography, share & comment on photos, or seek advice and firsthand experience with various pieces of equipment.
I think you’re way overestimating the influence and reach of DPreview. If it was so all powerful, it wouldn’t be disappearing.
Not “all powerful” - but enough to give some headwind.
There are setting on the dial between 0 and 11.
The E word that is used with M43 is pretty much just the M43 tagline… Hardly anyone seems to really use the E word when talking about APS-C, and basically never when talking about phone cameras.
I cover my bases with my a M43, APS-C, and FF bodies…
If you don’t want to hear about it (and I’m with you on that), then why did you bring it up?
Equivalence is a subject that will never cease to exist with our format. FF advocates are jealous of M43 size, weight and cost advantages, and M43 users will envy FF image quality and bokeh. In the end is a decision and a compromise. I’m not willing to sacrifice the advantage of walking around an European city with just my GX9 fitted with the 15mm f:1.7 for any kind of FF equivalent, which will never be as small, light or cheap as my kit. Is just not going to happen. At my 57 years of age I really value compact size and weight.
I’m not envious of anything. I just use what works -for me. That may not work for someone else. There are compromises to every system. The trick is to choose the system with the least amount of compromise for your own wants. Sometimes that’s a smaller format. Sometimes that’s a larger format. You don’t have to exclusively choose one or the other.
Oh, please don’t get me wrong. I don’t meant all of us are envious of other systems. What I mean is that people involved in EQ discussions in a heated way are usually venting their frustration from one side or the other. I also use what it works for me. Hopefully in this m43 specific forum discussions will be more constructive and civil than the fruitless EQ discussions in DPR which where a nightmare to moderate.
Constructive criticism is welcome, but criticize ideas , not people
This forum rule has a more commonsense approach than what was moderated on DPR.
We will never escape “equivalence” because the m4/3 companies themselves lean into it in their marketing and specifications.
All that truly matters, though, is that the users enjoy the process and the results.
Do they? I’m not sure I’ve seen that especially Certainly no more than any other format.
I just bought a new Pixel 6a phone. Advertised as having a nice F 2.0 main camera - which they put on the website. Not see anyone carping on that it is “really an F128” or whatever it may be.
Of look at the cut and paste from the Fuji website: “X100V features a new 23mm F2.0 lens to ensure that every detail from its X-Trans CMOS 4 Sensor is resolved beautifully. The lens has been enhanced for better resolution, lower distortion and improved close focus performance. However, it still maintains the same overall size and compatibility with legacy WCL/TCL lens attachments, which gives image-makers additional angle of views equivalent to 28mm and 50mm on 35mm Format.”
No one banging on forever that this is “really an F3.5”…
So I’m not sure you are right on this one.
Also ironic (and funny) - the ad on the right shows Amazon devastation.
For example, here is the text on the OM System website for the new 90mm Macro:
### High Magnification
There’s close, closer, and then there’s this. A whopping 2x (4x 35mm equivalent) magnification ratio opens up whole new possibilities. Need more? Add a teleconverter for up to 4x (8x equivalent).
So OM System is actually promoting the “35mm equivalence”.
I shot Pentax APS-C for 15 years, and “equivalence” was never really a point of contention, probably because APS-C was pretty much the original digital sensor and dominant format for so long. I’ve found that since moving to m4/3, I’ve at times done a bit of computing in my head to determine how lens on my G9 would compare to a lens on a Pentax K-3 - for example, the Sigma 56/1.4 on my G9 would be a bit longer and a bit shallower DOF compared with the Pentax DA 70/2.4 Ltd. But the longer I’m in the m4/3 system, the less I’ll need to think that way.
And that’s different from the Fuji X100V advert … how?
Kinda makes my point.
I don’t see that ad - I get an ad for boots